Sagario Kobe John D.

Second Case Study: Filipino or Spanish PoV? What really happened in Cavite Mutiny

Verdict: Filipino

A Response to Injustice: The Filipino Version of the Incident

Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher, wrote the Filipino
version of the bloody incident in Cavite. In his point of view, the incident was a mere mutiny by the
native Filipino soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal who turned out to be dissatisfied with the
abolition of their privileges. Indirectly, Tavera blamed Gov. Izquierdo’s cold-blooded policies such as the
abolition of privileges of the workers and native army members of the arsenal and the prohibition of the
founding of school of arts and trades for the Filipinos, which the general believed as a cover-up for the
organization of a political club.

On 20 January 1872, about 200 men comprised of soldiers, laborers of the arsenal, and residents of
Cavite headed by Sergeant Lamadrid rose in arms and assassinated the commanding officer and Spanish
officers in sight. The insurgents were expecting support from the bulk of the army unfortunately, that
didn’t happen. The news about the mutiny reached authorities in Manila and Gen. Izquierdo
immediately ordered the reinforcement of Spanish troops in Cavite. After two days, the mutiny was
officially declared subdued.

Tavera believed that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a powerful lever by
magnifying it as a full-blown conspiracy involving not only the native army but also included residents of
Cavite and Manila, and more importantly the native clergy to overthrow the Spanish government in the
Philippines. It is noteworthy that during the time, the Central Government in Madrid announced its
intention to deprive the friars of all the powers of intervention in matters of civil government and the
direction and management of educational institutions. This turnout of events was believed by Tavera,
prompted the friars to do something drastic in their dire sedire to maintain power in the Philippines.

Meanwhile, in the intention of installing reforms, the Central Government of Spain welcomed an
educational decree authored by Segismundo Moret promoted the fusion of sectarian schools run by the
friars into a school called Philippine Institute. The decree proposed to improve the standard of
education in the Philippines by requiring teaching positions in such schools to be filled by competitive
examinations. This improvement was warmly received by most Filipinos in spite of the native clergy’s
zest for secularization.

The friars, fearing that their influence in the Philippines would be a thing of the past, took advantage
of the incident and presented it to the Spanish Government as a vast conspiracy organized throughout
the archipelago with the object of destroying Spanish sovereignty. Tavera sadly confirmed that the
Madrid government came to believe that the scheme was true without any attempt to investigate the
real facts or extent of the alleged “revolution” reported by Izquierdo and the friars.
 Convicted educated men who participated in the mutiny were sentenced life imprisonment while
members of the native clergy headed by the GOMBURZA were tried and executed by garrote. This
episode leads to the awakening of nationalism and eventually to the outbreak of Philippine Revolution
of 1896. The French writer Edmund Plauchut’s account complimented Tavera’s account by confirming
that the event happened due to discontentment of the arsenal workers and soldiers in Cavite fort. The
Frenchman, however, dwelt more on the execution of the three martyr priests which he actually
witnessed.

Unraveling the Truth

Considering the four accounts of the 1872 Mutiny, there were some basic facts that remained to be
unvarying: First, there was dissatisfaction among the workers of the arsenal as well as the members of
the native army after their privileges were drawn back by Gen. Izquierdo; Second, Gen. Izquierdo
introduced rigid and strict policies that made the Filipinos move and turn away from Spanish
government out of disgust; Third, the Central Government failed to conduct an investigation on what
truly transpired but relied on reports of Izquierdo and the friars and the opinion of the public; Fourth,
the happy days of the friars were already numbered in 1872 when the Central Government in Spain
decided to deprive them of the power to intervene in government affairs as well as in the direction and
management of schools prompting them to commit frantic moves to extend their stay and power; Fifth,
the Filipino clergy members actively participated in the secularization movement in order to allow
Filipino priests to take hold of the parishes in the country making them prey to the rage of the friars;
Sixth, Filipinos during the time were active participants, and responded to what they deemed as
injustices; and Lastly, the execution of GOMBURZA was a blunder on the part of the Spanish
government, for the action severed the ill-feelings of the Filipinos and the event inspired Filipino patriots
to call for reforms and eventually independence. There may be different versions of the event, but one
thing is certain, the 1872 Cavite Mutiny paved way for a momentous 1898.

The road to independence was rough and tough to toddle, many patriots named and unnamed shed
their bloods to attain reforms and achieve independence. 12 June 1898 may be a glorious event for us,
but we should not forget that before we came across to victory, our forefathers suffered enough. As
weenjoy our freeedom, may we be more historically aware of our past to have a better future ahead of
us. And just like what Elias said in Noli me Tangere, may we “not forget those who fell during the night.”